Post by K. on Apr 18, 2015 16:29:04 GMT -5

Taking into account recent suggestions and feedback from members, staff has come up with the following proposed, expanded standard and guidelines for the types of behavior that constitute trolling. This standard attempts to balance, as fairly and clearly as possible, the interests and rights of Pulse's broad community, the interests of the board itself in maintaining a degree of professionalism, and the need for both consistency and adherence with overarching Proboards policy, over which we have little control.

The chief difficulty in enforcing trolling rules is to decipher between posters whose aim is to share their opinions (positive or negative) from those who intend to shame, silence, or harass those who have different opinions than themselves. These rules attempt to help with that.

Feedback is encouraged. There will likely be additional discussions in the future.

Trolling

Trolling is defined as:

A message (including a post, series of posts, PM(s), image(s), title(s), status(es), or signature(s)),

posted with the intent of upsetting or disturbing another poster, or derailing a thread,

in a manner or under circumstances unlikely to encourage substantive, on-topic discussion.

Guidance

The first element, above, makes clear that the prohibition on trolling applies to any message or communication on Pulse, not just posts.

The key element of trolling is an intent to upset, disturb, or derail (as compared to an intent to share or explain an opinion). Intent will be inferred from the surrounding circumstances. One thing staff will consider is whether a "reasonable poster" (aka, an objective, unbiased poster) would be upset or disturbed by the post. Generally speaking, posters should not be "upset or disturbed" by negative opinions of an artist or work, whether they are posted in a general or artist-specific thread. Nor should a poster be "upset or disturbed" when their opinion on an artist or work is challenged. Posters have the right to have, share, and defend their own opinions, and to challenge the opinions of others.

That said, repetitively abrasive, combative, or negative behavior can be "upsetting or disturbing," or derail a thread. An intent to troll can be inferred from such behavior. In an artist-specific thread, this type of behavior includes(i) repeatedly and solely bringing up negative news; or (ii) consistently attacking anyone who expresses a negative opinion. Both fans and non-fans can engage in trolling. Absent other circumstances indicating intent to troll, the repetitive behavior must be obvious and substantial.

Examples of behavior that indicates intent to troll:

insulting another poster's favorite artist instead of responding to the poster's point (on-point comparisons are allowed, but it is a fallacy to argue that because someone likes Artist X, what they are saying is not true);

Calling artists derogatory names or mocking them on a personal level, especially where inserted as a dig while making an unrelated point (e.g., X posts picture of himself riding a donkey and Y replies "Hey, you met ______!"; X writes "That b***h _____ with her ugly face just released a new album"). Discussions of image or criticisms of behavior are permitted where they are in reaction to a particular event and not designed to insult the artist generally (e.g., comments like "I'm afraid _____'s weight gain will hurt her sales" or "she looked like a giant banana in that performance," or "in light of recent events, ______ seems like a total jerk/racist")

Suggesting (explicitly or implicitly) that someone is an idiot or delusional just because they have a different opinion (to avoid an inference of intent to troll, explain why they are wrong)

Posting messages that appear to celebrate violence or use exceedingly vulgar or violent language.

The final element makes clear that in making decisions, staff will take into account the likelihood that the message could lead to substantive, on-topic discussion. Whether a message actually derails a thread is not determinative.

Post by ⭐Disco⭐ on Apr 18, 2015 19:55:16 GMT -5

An intent to troll can be inferred from such behavior. In an artist-specific thread, this type of behavior includes(i) repeatedly and solely bringing up negative news;

Question, let's say there has been a certain amount of negative things happening with a certain artist and there are news articles about it and within the context of discussing said situations, would it be considered trolling if we're just posting it to discuss them, or such news items should not be posted to avoid this issue? I am only asking this because some accused me of trolling in the Azealia Banks topic when I posted about all the beefs, dramas, and shocking incidents she was involved in over a particular period of time. If we are not allowed to discuss "negative" stories, that will force us to basically have to ignore these aspects of what's really happening and it would stifle discussion.

This is a really dangerous provision in the new policy because it basically forces to only post positive stories and articles lest it be interpreted as trolling.

Post by K. on Apr 19, 2015 6:00:36 GMT -5

An intent to troll can be inferred from such behavior. In an artist-specific thread, this type of behavior includes(i) repeatedly and solely bringing up negative news;

Question, let's say there has been a certain amount of negative things happening with a certain artist and there are news articles about it and within the context of discussing said situations, would it be considered trolling if we're just posting it to discuss them, or such news items should not be posted to avoid this issue? I am only asking this because some accused me of trolling in the Azealia Banks topic when I posted about all the beefs, dramas, and shocking incidents she was involved in over a particular period of time. If we are not allowed to discuss "negative" stories, that will force us to basically have to ignore these aspects of what's really happening and it would stifle discussion.

This is a really dangerous provision in the new policy because it basically forces to only post positive stories and articles lest it be interpreted as trolling.

The guidance says that "repeatedly and solely" bringing up negative news can constitute trolling. It allows for "criticisms of behavior . . . where they are in reaction to a particular event and not designed to insult the artist generally." And the ultimate thing we are looking for is an intent to upset or disturb other posters under circumstances unlikely to lead to substantive discussion.

Accordingly, I think we have to consider the degree and substance of the articles being posted. Would the articles themselves be considered trolling if written by a poster? Is the poster inundating the thread with repetitive articles that add nothing to the discussion and just piss off other posters? Is the poster combing through the internet for the most negative articles to post here? Or is the poster facilitating up-to-date conversation on the topic?

Some of the icons seen in this theme are being used pursuant to a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The copyright owners of these icons are Webdesigner Depot (the announcement icon) and Iconshock (the microphone icons on the forum pages, star icon, and poll icon). The microphone icons seen on the home page are being used pursuant to a Freeware Non-Commercial License with McDo Design (Susumu Yoshida). In accordance with these licenses, redistribution of the icons is not permitted. Please visit the owners' respective sites, linked above, if you wish to use these images.